From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755554Ab1KUInM (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2011 03:43:12 -0500 Received: from e23smtp09.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.142]:54621 "EHLO e23smtp09.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753937Ab1KUInH (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Nov 2011 03:43:07 -0500 Message-ID: <4ECA0F15.8010400@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 16:43:01 +0800 From: Xiao Guangrong User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110930 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Takuya Yoshikawa CC: Avi Kivity , Marcelo Tosatti , LKML , KVM Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] KVM: introduce kvm_for_each_memslot macro References: <4EC6226B.3080408@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4EC622F8.30005@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4EC8E2D3.1080804@redhat.com> <4EC9A136.7080004@oss.ntt.co.jp> <4ECA0D00.8080708@redhat.com> <4ECA0E87.4070909@oss.ntt.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <4ECA0E87.4070909@oss.ntt.co.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit x-cbid: 11112023-3568-0000-0000-000000C14A21 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/21/2011 04:40 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote: > (2011/11/21 17:34), Avi Kivity wrote: >>> Do you have any preference for the arguments ordering? >>> >>> I think placing the target one, memslot in this case, first is >>> conventional in >>> the kernel code, except when we want to place "kvm" or something like >>> that. >>> >>> But in kvm code, there seems to be some difference. >> >> You mean for the macro? Yes, making memslot the first argument is a >> good idea. Any difference in kvm code is not intentional. >> > > Yes. > > Xiao, please change the order if you have no problem. > OK, will change it in the next version, thanks!